June 28, 2004 | View Comments (5) | Category: Version 2
Summary: The winner of the April/May Edition is Chugs.
Please forgive the tardiness on this one. If you have sent me an email and I have yet to respond please be patient with me. Congratulations to Chugs for winning. I think I will let the judges do the talking on this one.
I chose Minz's because the search box was most effectively presented in the very center of my field of vision. The most basic task scenario to analyze at IMDB is for someone to arrive at the site, and then search for a movie or an actor for more information. Chugs also presented a search box in the center of the page, however it wasn't visually separated enough from surrounding elements to catch my eye. Also, the fluid, rounded boxes are hot... I'm always a sucker for that kinda stuff.
An IMDB redesign is a challenging project. The successful design needs to clearly display and communicate a large, and not always homogeneous, field of information.
Of the 3 finalists, Chugs' redesign comes out on top. The navigational lists at the top of the page, while lacking a bit of style, are easy to locate and quick to understand. The search tool is up front - great. The 4 columns of content could be better executed (introduce colour to seperate info, reduce the leading of the text), but at least all the info is in 4 neat columns. With the other designs, I found myself searching the page too long for bits of information. Also, Chugs' narrow columns of text are good for quick scanning. Which works well. When I visit IMDB I'm not looking for a novel, but small bite size pieces of information.
The overall visual appeal could be improved, but if I had to use a design to surf IMDB, I would use Chugs'.
I chose the Chugs III entry, but I was also quite fond of Minz Meyer's submission. Why? Primarily because they both put the search function front and center. I haven't done any user research on the IMDB, but I'd be willing to bet the majority of the visitors are there to search for something. While I love the playful colors, clever logo and rounded corners of Minz' entry, it ultimately felt a bit too commercial for the IMDB, at least in my estimation. At a glance, I feel like Minz' design is trying to sell me something, whereas Chugs III is trying to help me find the info I've come for. Michelle's design is nice -- I really like the use of white space (pun absolutely intended). However, the small search field tucked away in the upper corner just didn't feel appropriate to me. That being said, all three designs, as well as most of the non-finalists, are a big improvement over the existing IMDB. Great work and congrats to all three finalists!
Picking a winner out of these three submissions meant determining who the main audience for the site would be. You dont buy a membership to a movie site just to get information on recent releases because that information is already oversaturated in the market when advertising the movie. You would use IMDb and purchase a membership if you were a movie aficionado and were interested in old movies, obscure movies, and movie trivia. IMDb is more than just a reservior for a listing of new releases and I think that is what draws in IMDb's main audience.
So the two main things that I thought should have been at the top of the priority list with these redesigns were the IMDb Pro and an extended Search feature. All of that other information about current releases and showtimes you can get in other places, but its the vast amount of information in the site's database that separates it from competing sites. That is what I thought should have been emphasised. Find out what this site offers that other sites don't offer and highlight that.
The three finalists restructured a lot of the information nicely and handled the placement and emphasis on the Search feature fairly well, but all three finalists either moved from the main eye flow or completely removed the sections relating to IMDb Pro and other membership information.
This isnt to say that showtimes, recent dvd releases, birthdays and top movies should be removed from being displayed on IMDb, just perhaps not as the primary information.
Despite Minz's great design and easy-to-distingush sections, it focused too much on highlight the popular, information that can be found anywhere else, and not enough on highlighting the things that sets IMDb apart. It also completely removed the IMDb Pro feature.
Michele's design set aside a nice amount of space for advertising the IMDB Pro feature, but the design threw the Search feature into the top corner almost as an afterthought.
Chugs' design pulled enough "popular" information on the main page and mixed it with information and features that IMDb specializes in: the trivia, polls and news. The Search feature is blatant and well flushed out with options and extras to help people find what they're looking for. There is also an entire column devoted to having members log in and for explaining the IMDb Pro features. This design has enough sections of rotating content to keep the main page fresh and it has all of the essentials located at the top of the page for return visitors to quickly search what they're looking for and find it without having to wade through the information they don't need.
Congratulations to all three finalists. All three designs did an excellent job of organizing the overkill of information that was available on the original IMDb and made it much easier to navigate around. But, on the terms of considering IMDb's audience and what the IMDb site offers, I'm going to have to say that Chugs' design organized the best amount of relevent information in the right way.
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/269
Congratulations Chugs and good job to everyone else who entered. Good designs and good inspiration to the rest of us.
Bryan (http://www.juicedthoughts.com)
Thank you, judges, for all the comments on the finalists. I find it very interesting to see how you chose your winners from the three. And surprising :-)
It's a good job we're not all the same!
Peter (http://www.01010.org)
Keep track of comments to all entries with the Comments Feed
©2003-06 9rules, Inc. | Thoughts Feed | Notes Feed
Amazon Stores: Powertools | Jewelry | Books | Health | Landscaping | Kitchen | Movies
#1
My thanks to all those who voted, to the judges and to Paul, ofcourse.
Version I and II were my original submissions. Version III was done only as an after-thought as the contest got extended and I thought I could look at it in one more different way :)
Thanks again.
Chugs